On 11/25/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)waterwiki.info> wrote:
I saw Kiko just the other day. What is this innocent person, living
an ordinary life, doing on Wikipedia with false information about him?
Fred
_______________________________________________
Thank you, Fred. Again I ask, "What evidence do you have that nobs
did not attempt to discern the facts"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_E…
and
"I do a search on Kiko Martinez, one result says he blew himself up in
1970, another makes reference to Kiko Martinez's widow, and other
results cite Kiko Martinez attending rallies and lectures but does not
give a date. So I write, "Kiko Martinez, who may or may not have blew
himself up in 1970, attended rallies and lectures on unspecified
dates", yet cannot attribute that to one particular source, would be
considered original research. nobs 20:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC) "
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability&…
The point being Mr. Bauder voted to accept the case " Based on
Nobs01's edits to [[Talk:Chip Berlet]] " 02:42, 16 November 2005
(UTC), i.e. a Content Dispute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitratio…
Further evidenced by Mr. Bauder's next entry on the case,
"Ok, here's the problem. You put stuff on there about Kiko Martinez;
what does Chip Berlet have to do with Kiko Martinez? Fred Bauder
20:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)", i.e. a Content Dispute
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nobs01#Talk:Chip_Berlet
None of the Verifiable Citations I offered were intended as "personal
attacks"; if blatant errors existed in the source material, I am
extremely grateful for it being brought to my attention, which you
did. The very fact that I altered course from writing on various
Comintern activities in the 1930's & 1940's, to the NLG in the 1960's
was because of the harassment I received since August 2005 (now 15
months). WP:Harassment defined as "actions which disrupt the editing
activity of another user."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_…
But this evidence too was ignored.
Again, all I seek is a review and proposed modification of the
language, " The ban may be renewed for additional years by any 3
administrators after its expiration should personal attacks of the
virulence found in this case continue.", and perhaps clarification of
when the twelve months end in my probationary period (2006 or 2007?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_…
P.S. I believe in letting bygones be bygones, and am spending the
time now extensively reviewing all discussions on WP:ATT, WP:RS,
WP:BLP, and other such related discussions since last year. Thank
you.
Nobs01